From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <stephen.hemminger@vyatta.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Octavian Purdila <opurdila@ixiacom.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dcache: better name hash function
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:07:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091027100736.5303f1ab@nehalam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AE6A16F.4020002@gmail.com>
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:29:51 +0100
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Eric Dumazet a écrit :
> >
> >
> > 511 value on 64bit, and 1023 on 32bit arches are nice because
> > hashsz * sizeof(pointer) <= 4096, wasting space for one pointer only.
> >
> > Conclusion : jhash and 511/1023 hashsize for netdevices,
> > no divides, only one multiply for the fold.
>
> Just forget about 511 & 1023, as power of two works too.
>
> -> 512 & 1024 + jhash
>
> Guess what, David already said this :)
Rather than wasting space, or doing expensive, modulus; just folding
the higher bits back with XOR redistributes the bits better.
On fast machine (Nehalam):
100000000 Iterations
256 Slots (order 8)
Algorithm Time Ratio Max StdDev
string10 2.505290 1.00 390628 0.00
xor 2.521329 1.00 392120 2.14
SuperFastHash 2.781745 1.00 397027 4.43
fnv32 2.847892 1.00 392139 0.98
djb2 2.886342 1.00 390827 0.12
string_hash31 2.900980 1.00 391001 0.20
string_hash17 2.938708 1.00 391122 0.20
full_name_hash 3.080886 1.00 390860 0.10
jhash_string 3.092161 1.00 392775 1.08
fnv64 5.340740 1.00 392854 0.88
kr_hash 2.395757 7.30 4379091 1568.25
On slow machine (CULV):
100000000 Iterations
256 Slots (order 8)
Algorithm Time Ratio Max StdDev
string10 10.807174 1.00 390628 0.00
SuperFastHash 11.397303 1.00 397027 4.43
xor 11.660968 1.00 392120 2.14
djb2 11.674707 1.00 390827 0.12
jhash_string 11.997104 1.00 392775 1.08
fnv32 12.289086 1.00 392139 0.98
string_hash17 12.863864 1.00 391122 0.20
full_name_hash 13.249483 1.00 390860 0.10
string_hash31 13.668270 1.00 391001 0.20
fnv64 39.808964 1.00 392854 0.88
kr_hash 10.316305 7.30 4379091 1568.25
So Eric's string10 is fastest for special case of fooNNN style names.
But probably isn't best for general strings. Orignal function
is >20% slower, which is surprising probably because of overhead
of 2 shifts and multipy. jenkins and fnv are both 10% slower.
The following seems to give best results (combination of 16bit trick
and string17).
static unsigned int xor17(const unsigned char *key, unsigned int len)
{
uint32_t h = 0;
unsigned int rem;
rem = len & 1;
len >>= 1;
while (len--) {
h = ((h << 4) + h) ^ get_unaligned16(key);
key += sizeof(uint16_t);
}
if (rem)
h = ((h << 4) + h) ^ *key;
return h;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-27 17:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <9986527.24561256620662709.JavaMail.root@tahiti.vyatta.com>
2009-10-27 5:19 ` [PATCH] dcache: better name hash function Stephen Hemminger
2009-10-27 5:24 ` David Miller
2009-10-27 17:22 ` [PATCH] net: fold network name hash Stephen Hemminger
2009-10-27 18:02 ` Octavian Purdila
2009-10-27 22:04 ` [PATCH] net: fold network name hash (v2) Stephen Hemminger
2009-10-28 6:07 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-28 9:28 ` David Miller
2009-10-28 15:57 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-10-27 6:07 ` [PATCH] dcache: better name hash function Eric Dumazet
2009-10-27 6:50 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-27 7:29 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-27 17:07 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2009-10-27 17:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-10-27 23:08 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-10-27 23:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-10-28 0:10 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-10-28 0:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-10-28 1:56 ` Stephen Hemminger
[not found] ` <4AE72B91.7040700@gmail.com>
2009-10-27 17:35 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-10-25 19:58 [PATCH next-next-2.6] netdev: better dev_name_hash Octavian Purdila
2009-10-26 4:43 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-10-26 22:36 ` [PATCH] dcache: better name hash function Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>, Al Viro
2009-10-27 2:45 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-27 3:53 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-10-27 16:38 ` Rick Jones
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20091027100736.5303f1ab@nehalam \
--to=shemminger@vyatta.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=opurdila@ixiacom.com \
--cc=stephen.hemminger@vyatta.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).